E-Verify divides House panel along party lines

As the Senate vaulted Wednesday toward passage of a mammoth immigration bill, the House fought over a tiny provision to check worker status.

The House Judiciary Committee spent the day parsing a bill that would mandate an obscure electronic verification system known as E-Verify. Framed as a debate over American workers, party-line tensions underscored the complexities of bolstering security without threatening civil rights.

Text Size

-

+

reset

And with the Senate bill staring down the lower chamber, the debate granted Republicans a chance to tout progress on immigration reform and Democrats ground to clamor for a fuller package. The bill passed 22-9.

“Without top to bottom reform of our immigration laws, expanding E-Verify would devastate the agricultural industry, result in closed farms, a less secure America and the mass offshoring of millions and millions of U.S. jobs,” said Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.), one of the negotiators in a broad immigration bill that appears to have stalled.

Republicans, who pushed a similar bill last session, consider E-Verify a vital tool to combat identity theft and reconstruct the nation’s immigration laws. Only 7 percent of employers currently use the system.

The bill “balances the need of the American people regarding immigration enforcement with the needs of the business community regarding a fair and workable electronic employment verification system,” Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.) said.

The committee, thus far, has tackled immigration reform in chunks. Lawmakers recently approved bills on interior enforcement and agricultural guest workers and will consider one Thursday on high-skilled workers.

The goal, should a comprehesive bill unravel, is to have something to have in conference with the Senate. House Majority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) has said he won’t advance anything without support of the majority of House Republicans.

Democrats despise the piecemeal approach and have found particular leverage in this bill to demonstrate why.

“Increased enforcement fails to address the 11 million undocumented individuals already living and working in the U.S.” Judiciary ranking member Rep. John Conyers (D-Mich.) said. “It hurts the nation’s economy and does nothing to fix our broken immigration system.”

Just as in the Senate’s version, the bill would require all employers to use the E-Verify system. It would add provisions that lock Social Security numbers so they can’t be stolen. And it would give employers an out if they make “good faith” efforts to comply with the requirements.

The House bill, which focuses on new hires, starts the phase-in process years before the Senate’s legislation. It has sidestepped the ire of privacy groups by stopping short of the Senate’s photo matching requirements. But unlike the Gang of Eight bill, it provides few safeguards for mislabeled employees.

“There’s little protection for anyone authorized for work who gets caught up in the E-Verify system unfairly,” warned Rep. Judy Chu (D-Calif.).

Civil rights groups fear it would engender discrimination and leave innocent employees with marred records. Supporters point to a nominal error rate and say it would help ward off undocumented workers.

“We need to do all we can to protect the wages of American workers,” said Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Texas), who spearheaded the bill.

Almost all of the 20 amendments ping-ponged on party votes — a contrast to the Senate Judiciary Committee, which found E-Verify changes one of the few things on which it could agree.

Republicans united against Democratic calls for employee exceptions, including amendments by Conyers and Chu that would have punished employers who misused the system.

Democrats tried for a slew of others, from an E-Verify ombudsman to exemptions for labor unions and hiring halls. They failed.

Rep. Raul Labrador (R-Idaho), who recently pulled out of the House’s comprehensive negotiations, offered the only Republican-bloc dissent.

Labrador said he would vote for the bill, “but I do wholeheartedly believe that the only way E-Verify is going to be sufficient … is if we actually find a way to figure out what to do with the 11 million people that are here.”

Supporters of an expanded system lauded the bill’s passage. Rights groups sighed.

“It’s the same old enforcement,” said the National Immigration Law Center’s Emily Tulli, “with no real solution.”